Forum Thread

You mean something like This?

Let me explain:

I linked FNAF1 song by TLT. In the comments there was a link to It's Time To Die by DAGames, which is full of swearing.

As you said, you would have to purposely scroll down.

---

Oh.

@Pony no. That suggestion is saying to automatically censor all swear words. It would still not be usefull for the Youtube scenario (not having a censor filter on the comments, having to scroll down to find) or for any other site without a censor filter.

I totally agree. You cannot be warned for a swear you didn't post on purpose. That rule should use some lines, because they are a bit blurred...

Full support!

With the swearing rule the way it is, I can't link the most innocent of videos.

---

bump

Quote

See and I think that's fine, with the swearing being censored or beeped out. It's not saying it, you can't technically hear it, or you just got lucky and no one found it. xD

Can I just say that this right here should apply On-Site as well? If you censor, bleep out, or use a "PG-13 Alternative" you can still get warned/locked for it. At least that is what THREE of the mods at the time told me when I asked about it.

So "Oh fudge" can get you warned. So can "[censored]" if they take that to be a swear word.

The rules on this are so convoluted that the staff can use it to warn for just about anything. And if the other party is fine with swears, why is there an issue with it in private chats? (Which is also the case. It used to be fine as long as you and the other person agreed that cursing was fine. It just had to be a mutual agreement. Now, though, what used to be fine will get my account locked if I ever have to report the palpad thread for whatever reason.)

I firmly believe that the rules should be changed on some level.
Plus, the website that's linked doesn't really help a whole lot, since some of the swears that are listed as "Mild" or "Non-offensive" are still warning worthy on here. (I don't remember any specific examples, but I spent hours upon hours on the website for the laughs when it was first added to the rules page)





Also, getting warned/locked over something posted in the comments is completely unfair. Same for tumblr where it shows the re-blogs and stuff. These update EVEN AFTER THE LINK HAS BEEN SHARED so what was a clean page when it was linked could have one or two people show up afterwards and all of a sudden it's against the site rules. How is that, in any way, fair?

Plus, the thing about the warning? Why would that be against the rules? There are some things that we want to link where other content within the page might violate the rules. (Several of the image sites, which show "suggested media" to view, come to mind.)

So if it's a site that might have swears on it after or the swears are on unrelated content, doing the warning "[Might contain swears]" should be enough to cover our.... yeah.



Please note: I have not gotten warned for swears where it wasn't warranted (and to be fair, the other person started it, pushed it too far, and I finally just snapped back at them because apparently blocking someone doesn't affect palpads if they don't re-load the page. At least it didn't at the time. And it started in the forums and they edited out all of their stuff before the mod got to it...)

However, I was told that we can get warned for those things that I mentioned right away.

---

i agree navuso, the swearing rule is convoluted

---

bump

support i sya this because i see at least 3 members daily posting about 'yaoi' which if they can post about that we should be able to swear

---

I'm sorry, but unless we have a different definition of 'yaoi', I haven't seen any such feeds, only feeds about two guys in a relationship and I'm not quite understanding why that should mean you shoukd be allowed to swear?

(Because I haven't seen any feeds, that were truly 'yaoi')

---

I agree with @CatLady

Here's the definition according to The Urban Dictionary
Yaoi is a slang meaning 'boys love' or homosexuality that is used in the japanese language. Popular with fangirls who like their favorite anime guys to kiss.

I see nothing wrong with so, if the definition you're thinking is 'bad' that means me and my Girlfriend need to be banned because we're a Yuri couple
Yaoi is simply the Japanese version of a Happy Homosexual couple, and I see nothing bad with so

As so, here's another definition
Yaoi is a Japanese word, which is actually something of an acronym. It comes from "YAma nashi, Ochi nashi, Imi nashi", which means "no climax, no point, no meaning".

In speech and writing, it's a slang term used to refer to stories that focus on homosexual relationships, usually between men. The female equivalent is yuri.

Besides, I dont think people are stupid enough to even SEARCH for yaoi's graphic content, the one people talk about here is" shounen ai"which is just cuddling and kissing between a homosexuals , nothing wrong with that

---

Imo, saying yaoi, yuri or hentai is oddly fine since some people don't know it, and as I said earlier

Its not your fault if your viewers are curious.

Full support

Yeah I see many people cuss that are mod's friends and they don't get anything. I see people make dirty jokes and still.
Yea. I've seen many Eddsworld fans say "HENTAI HENTAI" Kids this century know all thing sexual....

---

Just wondering... how exactly do you know that a mod's friend hasn't had to deal with the consequences? Not everyone declares it to the world when they get a warning. It's meant to be confidential - just because you didn't see a lock, doesn't mean consequences weren't inflicted. We most definitely try our best to not be biased.

Secondly, if you believe someone has said something inappropriate, report it. We aren't robots. We cannot immediately see everything that has been posted - that's why there's a report button.

---

SilverStar is right. I was a MiT once so I have a good idea of how the system works, and I know it can be difficult. But I also agree that scrolling through comments and/or things later down on the page and getting warned for that is kinda ridiculous. I do get this is a kids game, but I don't think something someone said half way down on a page should resort in a warning. Imo, that's pushing it a bit.

BUMP

Bump

I debated quite a while with myself about posting here, but as this keeps getting bumped, I decided to just go for it and see if I can shed some light on the issue and explain our perspective.

The things you're talking about [getting warned for posting a swear in a linked image/video] happened way before the rules-update. Even with a warning in it. Even if they post 'contains swears', people would be able to abuse it, if we were to allow it. Posting links to inappropriate content [image/video/...], is [in my eyes] just a way to get around the rules as I've had many lovely messages through images, so why should we close our eyes for it?
All we did with the rule change, was made it explicit, but I didn't hear anyone complaining when it was enforced implicitly, so I honestly don't know what to think.

Just... what change to the swear rule would you suggest? It's all in our execution and how we apply the rules; aside from being more explicit, the rules themselves didn't change. All we did, was put the way we handled things into words, so users have a better idea of how we [try to] handle things. Is there any proof that we haven't toned down our way of handling swears and the way we try to decide between a warning and a PM?

---

Actually, before the rules were re-inforced, we could post links with warnings before them, and we would't get in trouble. For example, there was one day the entire PH posted Gizoogle links of their userprofiles and putted warnings about swears before it, and none got in trouble.

Nowadays, if we put warnings before a link we still get warned. And also, we get warnings for comments with swears and other things that aren't the main thing on the link, both things that we can't control.